SHRI SUMANT KUMAR SHARMA vs SHRI JAGJEET SINGH

Judgment text excerpt

$~82 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21st July, 2025 + CM(M) 899/2025 & CM APPL. 29181-29182/2025 SHRI SUMANT KUMAR SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: None. versus SHRI JAGJEET SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ishu Arora and Ms. Parul Ghosh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was taken up. 2. However, since the respondent is already served, the respondent is present along with his counsel. 3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that the matter remained for the evidence of the defendant on various previous opportunities also and, since the intention and endeavour of the defendant was, merely, to delay the proceedings on one pretext or the other, the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality or perversity and, therefore, there is no requirement of interfering with the order. 4. It is, however, noticed that on the relevant date i.e. 19.02.2024, the defendant appeared before the learned Trial Court as the case was fixed for recording of his evidence. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 899/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:23.07.2025 17:16:06 5. Though, he apprised the learned Trial Court that he was suffering from fever and was not in a position to get his deposition recorded, the learned Trial Court referred him to dispensary and sought a report from the Doctor about his health condition. 6. After such medical examination, the defendant appeared before the Court, immediately, and it was also reported to the learned Trial Court that he was fit for giving statement. 7. However, learned counsel for the plaintiff had, earlier, sought a pass over and, therefore, defendant was asked to wait for the counsel for the plaintiff so